MP31-15 TELEUROLOGY: EXPANDING HORIZONS TO INPATIENT ECONSULTS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 May 2022MP31-15 TELEUROLOGY: EXPANDING HORIZONS TO INPATIENT ECONSULTS Nathan Feiertag, Benjamin Green, Justin Loloi, Brendon Hopgood, Farzaan Kassam, Olsjon Shperdheja, Priya Dave, Jubin Matloubieh, Jennifer Nauheim, Mustufa Babar, Max Abramson, Alex Sankin, Nitya Abraham, Ahmed Aboumohamed, Alexander Small, Jillian Donnelly, Frank Lowe, Melissa Laudano, and Kara Watts Nathan FeiertagNathan Feiertag More articles by this author , Benjamin GreenBenjamin Green More articles by this author , Justin LoloiJustin Loloi More articles by this author , Brendon HopgoodBrendon Hopgood More articles by this author , Farzaan KassamFarzaan Kassam More articles by this author , Olsjon ShperdhejaOlsjon Shperdheja More articles by this author , Priya DavePriya Dave More articles by this author , Jubin MatloubiehJubin Matloubieh More articles by this author , Jennifer NauheimJennifer Nauheim More articles by this author , Mustufa BabarMustufa Babar More articles by this author , Max AbramsonMax Abramson More articles by this author , Alex SankinAlex Sankin More articles by this author , Nitya AbrahamNitya Abraham More articles by this author , Ahmed AboumohamedAhmed Aboumohamed More articles by this author , Alexander SmallAlexander Small More articles by this author , Jillian DonnellyJillian Donnelly More articles by this author , Frank LoweFrank Lowe More articles by this author , Melissa LaudanoMelissa Laudano More articles by this author , and Kara WattsKara Watts More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002580.15AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Telemedicine use rapidly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the efficacy of telemedicine in the inpatient setting has yet to be addressed. To this end, we measured patient and provider satisfaction with video and face-to-face (FTF) consults for inpatient urology consultations and sought to identify the urologic conditions most suitable for video consults. METHODS: New inpatient urology consults between August 2021-October 2021 were randomized to either video or FTF consult. Patient surveys were administered within 24 hours to assess satisfaction and perceived quality of care during the consult (3-point ordinal Likert scale). Survey results were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests. Participating urology attendings completed a survey assessing satisfaction and utility of both consultation mediums (3-point ordinal Likert scale), and suitability of video consults for common urologic consultation conditions (5-point ordinal Likert scale). RESULTS: A total of 48 patients were included; 23 (48%) received video consult and 25 (52%) FTF consults. There were no significant differences in age or race between the cohorts. The most common reasons for consultation were acute urinary retention (Video: 5 [22%], FTF: 5 [20%]) and urolithiasis (Video: 5 [25%], FTF: 3 [12%]). Both cohorts agreed that they were overall satisfied with their visit (Video: 22 [95.7%], FTF: 25 [100%]; p=0.297), received high-quality care (Video: 22 [95.7%], FTF: 23 [92.0%]; p=0.61), and would accept the visit modality again in the future (Video: 21 [91.3%], FTF: 25 [100%]; p=0.14). Urologists agreed on the utility of both consultation mediums, including ability to gather complete information (Video: 7 [100%], FTF: 7 [100%]) and manage the patient (Video: 6 [85.7%], FTF: 7 [100%]; p=0.71). Physician satisfaction was lower for video consult than FTF (Video: 5 [71.4%], FTF: 7 [100%]; p=0.38), and physicians were less likely to agree that video consults were satisfactory compared to FTF visits (4 [57.1%]). The most suitable urologic conditions for video consultation were elevated PSA and urinary retention (4.85±0.38), followed by urinary incontinence and nephrolithiasis (4.71±0.49). The least suitable was scrotal wall swelling (2.71±0.76). CONCLUSIONS: With increasing telemedicine utilization, video consults offer an alternative to FTF rounding that may combat difficulties of urologist shortages. Video consults enable urologists to see a wide variety of inpatient consults without hindering patient satisfaction. However, adoption of this tool will rely on physician preference and competence with video technology. Source of Funding: None © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 207Issue Supplement 5May 2022Page: e527 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Nathan Feiertag More articles by this author Benjamin Green More articles by this author Justin Loloi More articles by this author Brendon Hopgood More articles by this author Farzaan Kassam More articles by this author Olsjon Shperdheja More articles by this author Priya Dave More articles by this author Jubin Matloubieh More articles by this author Jennifer Nauheim More articles by this author Mustufa Babar More articles by this author Max Abramson More articles by this author Alex Sankin More articles by this author Nitya Abraham More articles by this author Ahmed Aboumohamed More articles by this author Alexander Small More articles by this author Jillian Donnelly More articles by this author Frank Lowe More articles by this author Melissa Laudano More articles by this author Kara Watts More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ...